As I go about journalist gatherings, I hear endless bashing of Nikki Finke. She's nuts. She's biased. She has an agenda. She's a hater. She's irresponsible. She's tardy with her copy.

I've written some vicious things about her myself before coming to my senses and erasing them.

Nikki Finke is a great reporter and a great writer.

Disclaimer: She's to the left of me politically. I've never met the woman. She's never done me any favors. I owe her nothing.

In this week's LA Weekly, she produces another absorbing column. She's just racking up scoop after scoop. I love it that the LA Weekly is jumping into the Internet age with updates when they happen, not just stuff for the weekly paper.

I read Nikki this week and I wish I could be this good. I understand hating her for being so good. I understand jealousy.

Nikki has a gift for getting the inside information and the telling anecdote. I think she's better at this than anyone writing on entertainment.

My yarmulke's off to you Nikki, and I pull out my fringes as well and wave them around. And I'll drink a glass of wine and say "L'Chaim."

The best choice for the LAT's TV critic position is Cathy Seipp but she has simply written too many critical things about that somnolent newspaper and it will never forgive her for it.

It's been too long on this blog since someone has reminded us of what a dull complacent bore this paper is, what a lack of diversity it has among its reporters (80% plus Democrats) and columnists (almost all to the left?), and what dull writers. There's not a single person at the LA Times who I look to read. And I still read the paper every day because you have to if you want to be informed about our state.

The book section is particularly awful and particularly slanted.

Carina is a terrific writer, full of life -- the living, breathing kind unknown to most 800-year-old critics such as Rancid Howie. It's a shame Nikki Finke finds a writer like Chocano unfit for Howie's piss-stained, hate-filled shoes. While I admit to enjoying some his stuff in the 1980s, for the last dozen years his column has been a plea for help, the sad yelps of another overpaid middle-aged male entertainment columnist who can't seem to comprehend how the rest of the world doesn't spend 10 hours each day angrily watching videotapes of crap teevee shows.

I would imagine the main reason those other "big names" -- in the under-50 crowd, a popular writer at a popular online magazine means a lot more than somebody punching the clock at another shrinking newspaper nobody reads -- didn't take the bait has more to do with the LAT's sketchy reputation than the evils of living in L.A. Or maybe not. Maybe they're just settled and have kids in school and aren't excited about *any* newspaper job enough to pull up stakes. Carina is smart, young, funny, lives in L.A. and will surely make the best of working for the LAT. I hope she gets to work at home, safe from the "guidance" of the lifers!

Oh, and this was sweet:

"Given Chocano's clips, Hollywood immediately began to ask if she's Rosenberg lite. The point is that, after primarily making fun of The Bachelor and Survivor, she has yet to show the necessary chops to push hot-button issues, which Rosenberg did so ably."

Really? Who exactly in the Hollywood industry could possibly want another glum whiner like Rosenberg? And exactly what was it Howie did so ably? Wag his finger at each and every little thing that didn't meet his 1960 standard of three networks? Wow, I hope "Hollywood" recovers from such a tragic loss.

What Ken said.

If only the LAT would take more risks hiring young "unproven" (meaning, it seems, "not from the staff of the NYT") writers like Carina, the coverage, particularly of culture, will start looking up. And when, oh God, are they going to replace Robert Hilburn? I know he's a nice guy but the rock-n-roll beat needs someone with an ear to the ground, not an ear to the past.

Nowhere in NF's column is the new TV critic challenged on the basis of age. Only content. Or isn't that a legitimate basis to criticize someone? Layne and his friends can't read.

Actually, David, we read quite well, thank you. If you read Nikki's article again without moving your lips as your finger traces the letters, you might notice that her implied criticism is that Carina's clips aren't substantial enough, that she was only at EW for less than a year and that her previous experience was as a freelancer for Salon. All of those are basically synonyms for "young writer". Howard Rosenberg, of course, has a clip file a mile thick but the good ones were all written decades ago. Carina might be green in comparison but I venture that 's a good thing. There's enough dead wood sitting around major daily newsrooms, no need to drag in more.

I think the Times is praying that she'll be their own, homegrown Lisa deM. Somehow I doubt it. While her relative lack of experience may not be a big deal, I'd say that it's just another sign that the Times is backing away from serious entertainment writing. Her Salon stuff wasn't earth-shattering, but then it didn't need to be. Anyone who's really interested in show-biz reporting and criticism, reads the trades.